Talk:Indentation (typesetting)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One space[edit]

"For an example of the second meaning, this is an indentation of one space:"
That looks like a very large space... Shouldn't it say that its indentation is one tabstop or something? Actually, I have no idea how big that is... Daniel15 (Talk/Contribs) 06:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced it with just a space. Nene 21:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indentation in CSS layout?[edit]

shouldn't this cover how to do this in CSS? --76.215.139.65 (talk) 17:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In that case we should have a how-to-do-it-in-CSS-section in every other typography-related article. And also how-to-do-it-in-TeX, how-to-do-it-in-troff, how-to-do-it-in-MS-Word, and so on. For this kind of how-to information WikiBooks would be a lot better place. Nene (talk) 07:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Religious war"[edit]

One of the last lines in the text claims that "some" classify indentation as a religious war. I didn't want to blatantly delete this statement because I didn't know if I was correct in assuming that there is no possible way indentation can be classified as a religious war. A religious war is as it implies: a war over religious differences or something involving religion. I'm going to give it a {fact} tag because it's not cited and uses "some" as a subject (a classic weasel word). If the problem remains unresolved for some time, the statement should be deleted. 24.15.197.87 (talk) 02:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The text is actually, "akin to a religious war." The "akin" being important. Maybe the link to the religious war article is not the best reference. I checked Wiktionary, but it only has the same meaning. Not up on Wiktionary styles, but perhaps someone with more Wiki-Fu could add an alternate/slang meaning to the Wiktionary definition that more closely matches a meaning of "conflict between two or more groups, each of which believes wholeheartedly it is defending the only correct position and refuses to be persuaded otherwise", then link the phrase there? 159.247.3.230 (talk) 00:39, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Editor war article specifically mentions "holy wars" over, among other things, "source code indent style."
I think there's more than a little bit of sarcasm, parody, and joking around in this context,
so perhaps this article could more clearly point out that it's a joke. --DavidCary (talk) 23:38, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO use of wording like holy war in this context goes beyond joking. It's hyperbolic, insensitive and ugly. The world needs more compassion. Stevebroshar (talk) 19:34, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indentation vs. extra spacing to separate paragraphs[edit]

Is the hard return becoming the new emerging standard? Obviously Wikipedia uses it, but I see it used a lot elsewhere too. Tisane talk/stalk 09:33, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Indentation (typesetting). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:51, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Indentation (typesetting). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:10, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Indentation (typesetting). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:54, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

Indentation and tab stops strike me as integrally related concepts with tab stops being a reasonable subsection of indentation. As such, I propose that Tab stop be merged into this article. —jameslucas ▄▄▄ ▄ ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▄ 20:40, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indentation is only one of several uses of tab stops (see that article's own "see also" section), and tab stops are only one of several ways to perform indentation (see, e.g., style sheets). Neither topic is a subset of the other. 2605:A601:AB42:5B00:D79A:70A3:B6A4:34BF (talk) 02:25, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A good note! Some of the current Tab stop article is more about Typographic alignment than indentation. Ultimately, I don't think this is a major impediment to the merger I'm proposing, but I agree that the modern digital version of the tab stop deserves to have its capabilities accurately documented in the appropriate place. A clearly worded paragraph and a suitable cross reference is deserved. Thank you! —jameslucas ▄▄▄ ▄ ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▄ 03:04, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(Hi, jameslucas, same person as before, though my IP may have changed) I believe the primary impediment to the merge is that it's based on your statement that they "strike you as integrally related concepts", which you have not made a case for, and I've made a case against. In fact I would say they are tepidly related concepts: one is an aesthetic principle, and one is a mechanism. The aesthetic principle has been used in typesetting for centuries (and may even predate it in handwritten prose; not sure), while the mechanism originates on typewriters, where it was frequently used to align tabular information and sometimes to achieve indents. In electronic publishing today, indentation is still widely used but is more commonly achieved with style sheets than tab stops. Ultimately, the Venn diagram of the two things has more non-overlapping area than overlapping—not a sign of "integrally related" concepts that warrant merging. —Karn 2605:A601:AB5A:7800:51F2:116F:E9D5:E6DD (talk) 07:34, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Split out programming section[edit]

This article is called "indentation (typesetting)" and consists of two sections: "Indentation in typesetting" and "Indentation in programming". By the names alone, I'd say this page begs to be split in two with the programming section in a page named "indentation (programming)". Further, the programming section seems to have a significant story to it that is outside of just typesetting. IMO these sections beg to be separate pages from their conceptual differences as well.

In case someone considers it, I do not recommend putting the programming section of this article into indentation style. One thing that that page lacks is info about what indentation means in programming. And style is a concept at a different level than the indentation itself. Stevebroshar (talk) 14:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Indentation_(typesetting)&oldid=1207023323"